10 ms·
> that was probably criminal copyright infringement sounds more like "Fair Use", unless you imply the painting was made for the purposes of commercial advantag
by Jon_Lowtek 5y ago
> that was probably criminal copyright infringement
sounds more like "Fair Use", unless you imply the painting was made for the purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain.
As in: they painted it right before selling and used the image to advertise the house to young couples.
- kragen 5y agoPossibly. The thing about fair use is that you can never really tell. Commercial intent is only one of the four factors. The market-effect factor would also weigh in her favor. The other two factors — the nature of the work and the substantiality of the copying — plausibly weigh against her. Of course I don't think she'll be prosecuted, or I wouldn't think about posting this, but that's partly because she's not a well-known political dissident who the FBI has a pre-existing grudge against.